ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 70

[XtremeScorpio]

I like yer mama! ;-)

After hearing that AT has had dealings w/3 of the parents in the past, I'm changing my mind. That being said, it doesn't really matter what we, the public, think. What matters is what the law says about all of this.

I don't understand how AT thinks she can responsibly represent BCK knowing that she has dealt w/3 of the parents in the past. If I were an attorney, I would show bias towards the 3 parents.

BBM

Not to mention she's the POA for one of those parents.

ETA: she (AT) had to have known about X, because didn't her mom put AT as POA a few days AFTER the murders? I'm just picturing the conversation where AT said, 'well, can't your daughter do it' and mom replying with, 'well, no because.....'. JMO

 

[PrairieWind]

Wouldn't there be a number of Washington or Montana or Utah death penalty-qualified defense attys who are also licensed to practice in Idaho? It seems like either bringing in a new defense atty or moving the case to an adjacent state might be the easiest solution? MOO

the case can't be moved out of state.

 

[Luna20]

I suspect she cancelled the actual part 2 aspect of it due to the blowback the first interview got. MOO

Good point. She did say that social media was ablaze today regarding this and some people were upset about it.

 

[acutename]

The appearance of a conflict of interest in my opinion could possibly jeopardize the case.

I do not see the "appearance" language in either the ABA Model Rules or in the Idaho rules

'Model Rules of Professional Conduct

https://isb.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/irpc.pdf

believe that practice has backed off the "appearance" language because it is so subjective, but I do not have the history of all the ABA/Idaho rules to review. Current rules talk about "materiality" and "remoteness."

Maybe by reassigning CN(K) a new atty, ID authorities believe that any problem was cured- she is independently represented.

Also, I have to say so many times I have seen people in more populous states say: "why do we have so many lawyers?" Here you see, in a rural area, what happens when you have just a few. What is the likihood, in a rural area, that a lawyer or court officer would be in some possibly small way, acquainted with the family members of a defendant? Pretty likely IMO.

 

[kittythehare]

IMO Kohlberber may have known through his criminal justice studies that X mother had drug issues. I also think he loving that this is happenin. For all we know he has ways to gather info on victims.
He thinks he’s above law. he may just be smart enough to try and get away with this and that is scary imo

I'm not sure it would come under his area of study.
But had he been stalking them he could have found out if it was something she discussed publicly.
The only advantage it could bring him IMO is that his defense could label her an unreliable witness if she would be called to testify for the prosecution but it's highly unlikely that would occur in this instance from the little I know.
She was not a witness IMO.
Others have discussed how her associates could possibly be blamed but LE will already have almost certainly investigated that thoroughly already , I imagine.

I think he will certainly try to get away with it.
He has a very smart lawyer to help him with that.

I don't have a clue how he perceives himself right now. Or ever.
But he is smart enough to mount a confident appearance for his trial, I think.
Nothing is ever set in stone and there are no guarantees.
Just hoping justice will win the day.

 

[Thewiley]

IMO a defense attorney has to actively investigate the case for the client and present a vigorous defense. If one or more of the victims parents were involved in drugs, then that may be the best angle of defense available. The current attorney for the defedant has apparently handled various drug cases involving the previous client/victim's parent. IMO with the facts we know it would be malpractice not to extentsively investigate and probably argue this "drug" angle at trial.

IMO serious drug traffickers can and will resort to violence, including against family members of people who cross them. IMO certain street gangs favor using large knives in their crimes. With what we know, this seems like the most obvious defense theory, if they are trying to draw the focus away from their client..which is part of their job and ethical duty...IMO.

The problem is that for the defendant's current attorney it means investigating and possibly going after at trial, a former client for the things that you previously represented them for...IMO.

attorney client privilege, BK’s attorney can’t divulge her former clients information

 

[Twistinginthewind]

How Bryan Kohberger Could Lose His Lawyer​

Newsweek
Khaleda Rahman
1/26/23

" ... [...] ...
The Idaho Statesman reported that since Taylor took over the public defender's office in 2017, her office has defended the parent in four cases.

Legal experts say this raises questions about a conflict of interest for Taylor, while Cara Kernodle has said she feels betrayed by her former attorney and will refuse to sign a waiver to allow her to continue representing Kohberger.

Taylor could be removed from the case in a number of ways, according to the experts.

Cara Kernodle could "file a motion to disqualify Taylor from representing Kohberger. The prosecution can file that same motion, or the judge can raise the motion 'sua sponte' on its own accord," Neama Rahmani, an attorney and former federal prosecutor, told Newsweek.

"Sua sponte" refers to actions taken by a court without the prompting of either party in a case.

"The judge will then decide whether Taylor has confidential information about Kernodle related to the case," Rahmani said. "If so, that would constitute an actual conflict and Taylor won't be permitted to represent Kohberger going forward."

Rahmani said that even if Cara Kernodle does not seek to disqualify Taylor, there "is still a potential conflict of interest with respect to Kohberger."

He added that if Kohberger wishes to retain Taylor as his attorney, he will have to waive the potential conflict."

How Bryan Kohberger could lose his lawyer

 

[al66pine]

Kootenai County. Need for More DP Qualified PDs?

Yeah, but Kootenai County has grown considerable in the past 25 to 30 years. They should still have more than 1 DP public defender on hand.

@XtremeScorpio
Some would ask, why would Kootenai PD staff need to include more DP qualified attys?
The need for DP qualified PD here arose in a quadruple murder in LATAH County, not Kootenai Co.

 

[Helechawagirl]

The appearance of a conflict of interest in my opinion could possibly jeopardize the case.

Yes, it’s the “perception is reality” trope. If the masses perceive it as a conflict of interest, it becomes a conflict of interest. Jmo

 

[Helechawagirl]

IMO Kohlberber may have known through his criminal justice studies that X mother had drug issues. I also think he loving that this is happenin. For all we know he has ways to gather info on victims.
He thinks he’s above law. he may just be smart enough to try and get away with this and that is scary imo

How does he even know what is going on? Isn’t he restricted from media, internet etc? Asking as I do not know.

 

[al66pine]

Pursuing DP? Victims' Family?

If this is a DP case do all 4 families have to agree that BK get the death penalty for it to happen?

@Ccging
Briefly.
Nope. The Latah County Prosecuting Attorney determines the crim. offenses to pursue.
"The elected Prosecuting Attorney defends or prosecutes actions, applications, or motions in the District Court or Magistrate's division in which the People, the State or the County is a party."
"The Latah County Prosecutor’s Office handles State of Idaho felony cases arising in Latah County regardless of who the investigating agency might be." *

Not so briefly.
ID state victims rights statutes provide (over-simplifying here) that family members of murder (and other) victims may provide INPUT to prosecutors about charges and later in the sentencing phase may make "victim impact statements," families do not have the right to DECIDE whether the prosecutor should pursue the death penalty.**

Practically speaking---
In deciding whether to pursue the DP, prosecutors may consider INPUT from SURVIVING VICTIMS/FAMILIES and PUBLIC OPINION, but ultimately, prosecutor decides.
imo
As always, welcoming clarification or correction, esp'ly from our legal professionals.
_______________________________
* Prosecuting Attorney
** "....(6) To be heard, upon request, at all criminal justice proceedings considering a plea of guilty,
sentencing, incarceration or release of the defendant, unless manifest injustice would result."

https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/4943-idaho

"(f) Afforded the opportunity to communicate with the prosecution in criminal or juvenile
offenses, and be advised of any proposed plea agreement by the prosecuting attorney
prior to entering into a plea agreement in criminal or juvenile offenses involving crimes
of violence, sex crimes or crimes against children;..."

Section 22 – Idaho State Legislature

legislature.idaho.gov

https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/4943-idaho

 

[jepop]

snipped for focus
I think what troubles me the most is people acting as if the PD is some sort of ruthless shark who's unceremoniously dumped her former clients to take this case--I'm not saying you've said that, but that has been an attitude expressed repeatedly on this board. She was appointed to this case, just as she was appointed to the other cases, and it troubles me that she's being demonized for a decision that she did not initiate and, based on the logistics of the case, is likely unavoidable by both her and the court. MOO

This is also very troubling to me. IMO it is also an angle/suggestion/headline bait that some in the media have been pushing. The AB interview for e.g. MOO

ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 69

www.websleuths.com

 

[deugirtni]

How Bryan Kohberger Could Lose His Lawyer​

Newsweek
Khaleda Rahman
1/26/23

" ... [...] ...
The Idaho Statesman reported that since Taylor took over the public defender's office in 2017, her office has defended the parent in four cases.

Legal experts say this raises questions about a conflict of interest for Taylor, while Cara Kernodle has said she feels betrayed by her former attorney and will refuse to sign a waiver to allow her to continue representing Kohberger.

Taylor could be removed from the case in a number of ways, according to the experts.

Cara Kernodle could "file a motion to disqualify Taylor from representing Kohberger. The prosecution can file that same motion, or the judge can raise the motion 'sua sponte' on its own accord," Neama Rahmani, an attorney and former federal prosecutor, told Newsweek.

"Sua sponte" refers to actions taken by a court without the prompting of either party in a case.

"The judge will then decide whether Taylor has confidential information about Kernodle related to the case," Rahmani said. "If so, that would constitute an actual conflict and Taylor won't be permitted to represent Kohberger going forward."

Rahmani said that even if Cara Kernodle does not seek to disqualify Taylor, there "is still a potential conflict of interest with respect to Kohberger."

He added that if Kohberger wishes to retain Taylor as his attorney, he will have to waive the potential conflict."

How Bryan Kohberger could lose his lawyer

With the keywords being: "whether Taylor has confidential information about Kernodle related to the case". imo.

 

[jepop]

Yes, it’s the “perception is reality” trope. If the masses perceive it as a conflict of interest, it becomes a conflict of interest. Jmo

COI by media. MOO

 

[jcamh]

My concern, and maybe I'm way off-base with this thought--is that BK could use this to appeal a conviction, by claiming Taylor couldn't adequately represent him because she had a conflict. MOO

Or, if she is replaced with a different public defender, he would claim he did not have the most effective counsel because she is the top public defender.

 

[jcamh]

But how is it possible that she is the ONLY "death penalty qualified attorney" in this region??

What if she gets ill or something?
Not that I wish her that, of course.

JMO

The trial would be delayed until she was well.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

There could be a possibility that the murderer (BK is the accused suspect by LE, so will go with that premise that it is "he" for the sake of brevity) might have known beforehand/before the murders were committed that some of the victims' family members had had drug offenses which he could have learned about through public records beforehand/before the murders, and JMO he surmised that:

• Some of the victims' family members having had drug offenses could serve as possible distractions on "motives" as an attempt to obfuscate and to lead LE in other directions/on a wild goose chase/astray "And/Or:"
• The type of murders (stabbing people viciously one on one/one by one in their beds or bedrooms in the dark of the night) looked like a "crime of passion" that could have been committed by one of the four victims' intimate partners or ex partners or some random stalker/incel bent on revenge killings (e.g., someone in one or more of the 4 victims' personal sphere or just outside it) "And/Or:"
• The location of the murders (a college student rental house just off campus but "cheek and jowl" with fraternity/sorority houses) where 3 of the 4 victims lived and the 4th victim spent time, and the area the house was located was rumoured to be a a place to party and the house the victims lived/spent time in was rumoured to be a "party house" where, presumably, many many people's DNA would be present that would seriously complicate LE's ability to "dial in" on one person's DNA that could be the culprit.

So, IMOO, BK planned for and set up multiple versions of some "tell-tale" and/or relatively obvious possible distracting motives in an attempt to deflect from his motives (no one is privvy to) and/or to create a possible "perfect storm" of complex confusion on the motive for the murders in an attempt to "stump" local LE (Moscow PD).

Acknowledging that "motive" in and of itself is not a key component of solving murders and evidence truly is the "go-by" that can be used by the prosecution to prove innocence or guilt on a case by case basis, IMO, the evidence can often be the real "prove-out" that serves as the underlying reasons for motive.

IMOO the above possibilities are the basis(es) for why BK asked LE in PA upon his arrest something along the lines of "Have you arrested anyone else"?

IMO, that was because he thought he had been so thorough and comprehensive in setting up so many possible "ulterior motives" for the murders, that he was actually super surprised that LE "came for him" and so just had to throw further questions towards LE whether they did just come for "him alone" when he was arrested (and accused as the only suspect) when he really thought they would be distracted for so much longer, if not forever, in investigating the murders and identifying suspects.

JMOO, etc. and RIP Ethan, Kaylee, Maddie, and Xana <3, justice is coming

 

[jepop]

There is an appearance of a. conflict of interest, that’s enough.

I'm not so sure about that. For instance if AT is removed from the case via some process initiated by the DA owing to public (read political, DA is an elected official) pressure, I feel that would definitely be an appealable point down the road for the Defense. JMO. Also I don't think the prosecution would want this. I guess I'm thinking that public perception (IMO fueled by speculative and pot stirring media MOO), is not a reason per se to remove AT if it does not coincide with informed legal considerations re the COI. MOO

 

[Colorado303]

If we know the King Street house was a party house where drugs were often distributed (if only by partygoers) wouldn't the police and PD investigators have known this from the beginning? Surely both agencies know of the Mogen and Kernodle drug cases, past and present. Wouldn't Wouldn't they and the King Street survivors have been asked about the possibility that a conflict over drugs was the motive for the slaughter? Quite independent of confidential communications with the PD?

Since we're speculating on hypotheticals, I'll suggest that investigators for both agencies have been looking at this from the beginning, and have independently concluded it's a dead end.

It’s unlikely LE would have shared any information about the investigation, including a drug-related motive, with the Public Defender’s office at the time when BK’s ID attorney was appointed.

JMO

 

[jepop]

we're not sure. It depends upon whether a COI is present now or becomes an issue later. It's a complex legal argument and some great legal minds have been discussing it here over the past few hours.

It's been great to have all these legal minds on here commenting on the COI issue, IMO. Personally, I feel alot more informed.